Russia and the West:where are we headed?
One view of Russia cites the nation as believing they were 'wronged' by the West following on the heels of Soviet dissolution at the beginning of the Nineties. The West, in this view, began to surround Russia with military assistance pacts in Russia's own traditional haunts. The West, especially the US, failed to listen to Russian advice as strife ravaged the Balkans. The West, Russians believe, abrogated agreements to stop nuclear proliferation. And worst of all, these actions are part of a plot to keep Russia from its rightful place as a great nation. Where this war of perspectives is being fought is in the media. Valery Gergiev, Ossetian conductor of the London Symphony Orchestra represents this view as he speaks passionately, in English, about the Georgian attempt at genocide in South Ossetia before leading a Russian symphony in classic works associated with Mother Russia. Russian television stories in English posted to You Tube assert Georgian atrocities and Russian officials even state that American operatives accompanied Georgian forces in their thrust into South Ossetia in early August.
From a slightly different viewpoint, Vladimir Putin has restructured Russia to give the State power to redress Russia's grievances. Natural fuel resources have been nationalized and are being used to bludgeon recalcitrant neighbors. Oil revenues strengthen Russian military resources, in shabby repair when the Soviet state dissolved. Russia has poked its symbolic finger into international affairs, counterbalancing US interests and goals. And most recently, Russia flexed its muscles symbolically in Georgia. When the Georgians tried to assert themselves, massed Russian forces swatted them soundly, and that gesture shone a bright light on the West's inability to truly step in and exert its own power. To add insult to injury, Russian leadership alluded to US intervention in Iraq as a precedent for their action stating that the Georgian incursion into South Ossetia was akin to Sadaam Hussein invading Kuwait.
Statements from public podiums all over the West propound a different spin. The Russian invasion of Georgia is touted as use of disproportionate force, minimizing the serious folly of Georgia's own foray. Allusions to Cold War tactics and 19th Century Imperialism and the jockeying of Great Powers have been common. Segregation of Russia from the G8 and termination of the joint planning liaison with NATO are issues. Hypothetical scenarios in which Russia exerts force to bully its neighbors and real scenarios in which has put its thumb on energy supplies to those neighbors are talked about with speculation about where it all will lead. Commentators opine that the toothlessness of the West has been exposed or that the ruthless ambitions of Russia are on display.
Some part of each of these perspectives is probably accurate. Most significant, perhaps, is that the paranoia and sense of being oppressed by the outside world could make the Russian people more willing to risk foolhardy adventures behind nationalistic leadership. Their sources of information are clearly tuned to a jingoistic melody. Misjudgement in that arena could lead to an inadvertant hot war in the ever-volatile melange of countries with restive and aspiring minority populations. Just as dangerous, perhaps, is the media commentary in the West which tends to oversimplify what is happening and overamplify possibilities. Pragmatism about our true interests and our true abilities seems sensible. The old Roughrider axiom to 'walk softly and carry a big stick' might be useful. US strength, fully roused, is such that we needn't posture. And posturing unnecessarily makes our legitimate positions harder to see and support. I liked the Bill Clinton phrase at the convention that "people the world over have been more impressed by the power of our example than by the example of our power." That thought may be just right for the current situation.
From a slightly different viewpoint, Vladimir Putin has restructured Russia to give the State power to redress Russia's grievances. Natural fuel resources have been nationalized and are being used to bludgeon recalcitrant neighbors. Oil revenues strengthen Russian military resources, in shabby repair when the Soviet state dissolved. Russia has poked its symbolic finger into international affairs, counterbalancing US interests and goals. And most recently, Russia flexed its muscles symbolically in Georgia. When the Georgians tried to assert themselves, massed Russian forces swatted them soundly, and that gesture shone a bright light on the West's inability to truly step in and exert its own power. To add insult to injury, Russian leadership alluded to US intervention in Iraq as a precedent for their action stating that the Georgian incursion into South Ossetia was akin to Sadaam Hussein invading Kuwait.
Statements from public podiums all over the West propound a different spin. The Russian invasion of Georgia is touted as use of disproportionate force, minimizing the serious folly of Georgia's own foray. Allusions to Cold War tactics and 19th Century Imperialism and the jockeying of Great Powers have been common. Segregation of Russia from the G8 and termination of the joint planning liaison with NATO are issues. Hypothetical scenarios in which Russia exerts force to bully its neighbors and real scenarios in which has put its thumb on energy supplies to those neighbors are talked about with speculation about where it all will lead. Commentators opine that the toothlessness of the West has been exposed or that the ruthless ambitions of Russia are on display.
Some part of each of these perspectives is probably accurate. Most significant, perhaps, is that the paranoia and sense of being oppressed by the outside world could make the Russian people more willing to risk foolhardy adventures behind nationalistic leadership. Their sources of information are clearly tuned to a jingoistic melody. Misjudgement in that arena could lead to an inadvertant hot war in the ever-volatile melange of countries with restive and aspiring minority populations. Just as dangerous, perhaps, is the media commentary in the West which tends to oversimplify what is happening and overamplify possibilities. Pragmatism about our true interests and our true abilities seems sensible. The old Roughrider axiom to 'walk softly and carry a big stick' might be useful. US strength, fully roused, is such that we needn't posture. And posturing unnecessarily makes our legitimate positions harder to see and support. I liked the Bill Clinton phrase at the convention that "people the world over have been more impressed by the power of our example than by the example of our power." That thought may be just right for the current situation.
Comments